mrtaber Posted November 29, 2009 Share #1 Posted November 29, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, all. I am a database administrator by day, but I am returning to my art nights and weekends. I have also taken up photography. That's the background. My house was ransacked and burglarized about a month ago, and as I fill out the insurance forms, I'm thinking long and hard about what camera to buy to replace my little Nikon DSLR. The Nikon was nice, just too big to throw in my bag and go. The D-Lux 4 looks like it would be perfect for a relative photographic tyro, yet it also has full manual mode, which is how I would want to learn to use it. Having RAW output and HD video is icing on the cake. The other camera I am considering is the Ricoh GR Digital III; both are about the same price. Build quality is excellent on both, both are 10mp, both have video (Leica has higher res video), the Ricoh has a nice fixed lens, the D-Lux 4 has a very nice flexible lens. Only one has a red dot, however, and calls itself the Son of M8 Ideas, opinions? Basically, what I'm thinking is learning on a quality (but more affordable) camera, and then stepping up to more camera when I'm ready. I don't think the D-Lux 4 (or the Ricoh, for that matter) would hold me back on those counts. Thanks for your time, Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Hi mrtaber, Take a look here D-Lux 4 for learning (and savoring). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jsrockit Posted November 29, 2009 Share #2 Posted November 29, 2009 Seriously, learning on a point and shoot is not the best route to go. How about a compromise? Olympus E-P1 or something like that? The d-lux4 is ok, but not as your only camera for serious photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtaber Posted November 29, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted November 29, 2009 Hmmm. That could definitely work. The E-P1 is nice, as is the GF-1 (when you can get one). Prices are comparable. Thanks. Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted November 29, 2009 Share #4 Posted November 29, 2009 You might find some other useful suggestions in this thread...http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/107681-recommendation-young-man-who-just-fell.html Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_K Posted November 30, 2009 Share #5 Posted November 30, 2009 Will your style of photography involves low light which might call for a wider aperture? The D-lux might give you a little more flexibility at the telephoto end, if you are willing to push its limit to f/2.8 whereas the other 2 system cameras seem limited to a maximum of f/5.6 once you pass the 40mm focal length. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalina Posted November 30, 2009 Share #6 Posted November 30, 2009 I love my D-Lux 4 (most of the time), but now that the Panasonic GF1 is out, you have to give that a serious look. Get the one with the f/1.7 pancake lens. That would be perfect for me because I rarely need to zoom. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted November 30, 2009 Share #7 Posted November 30, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Seriously, learning on a point and shoot is not the best route to go. How about a compromise? Olympus E-P1 or something like that? The d-lux4 is ok, but not as your only camera for serious photography. JS, I have to respectfully disagree with you. Firstly, a novice to photography (although I'm not suggesting that that includes Mark) will benefit from a point and shoot camera that offers auto everything until he has an idea of what he likes to shoot and then wants to experiment by changing the settings, which the D-Lux 4 will offer - through to full manual if that's what he wants. Secondly, how is the Oly E-P1 not a point and shoot camera where the D-Lux 4 is? Yes, you can change lenses but that doesn't make it any less P&S does it? Thirdly, you say "The d-lux4 is ok, but not as your only camera for serious photography." and although I'm not clear what 'serious photography' is by your definition but perhaps you'd like to have a look at some of Jim Radcliffe's photography and let us know where you think the D-Lux 4 falls short of 'serious photography' please? Mark, You're quite right that the D-Lux 4 wouldn't hold you back for what you're seeking and one of the often overlooked strengths of the D-Lux 4 is it's macro performance that offers focus at 1 cm at the 24 mm focal length. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody Posted November 30, 2009 Share #8 Posted November 30, 2009 What aspect of photography do you want to develop first? Your 'eye' or the mechanics? If you are interested in walking around taking a bunch of photos to work on your timing, composition, etc, then a P/S will do fine. I have an LX3 which continues to surprise and impress me. You can't beat that lens. Using manual mode produces best results and is a good next step to understanding light (sunny 16 still works). I also sometimes carry an old Yashica T5 film camera for P/S shots. If you are interested in the mechanics, then I'd say you need to go the other direction and get a camera with full manual controls. On a budget, a used DSLR with a prime 35 or 50 lens would be my suggestion, though too big IMO for a carry-around camera. Depending on your budget, a used M8 with an older lens or CV lens would work too. Edit: Let me just add that if the 'savoring' part is important, get the D-Lux 4). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhabedi Posted November 30, 2009 Share #9 Posted November 30, 2009 The Online Photographer: The Leica as Teacher The Online Photographer: Why It Has To Be a Leica Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtaber Posted November 30, 2009 Author Share #10 Posted November 30, 2009 Thanks for all the comments, and the encouragement. At this point in time, I'm looking to do two things right now: start seeing "photographically," which is a matter of attention, intention; and also learning (with a goal to gain some greater amount of control over) the photographic trinity that comprise exposure: aperture, shutter speed, and ISO (well, there's more to it than that, but you know what I mean). Before, I was a profligate shooter. "Hey, that's the beauty of digital--just let it rip, shoot hundreds of shots, pick the handful that don't suck..." I don't approach my other art that way; it might work for some shooters, but I'm after more, so...I'm sending myself to school. The fact of a fixed lens, or a fixed zoom lens (as long as the optics are good) is a plus to my mind right now. Control the number of variables. I'm also not looking for lots of 'auto' functions. Even if I had the most advanced camera in the world at the moment, I would strip it back, throw a prime on it, and work within constraints. I learn best under that kind of "tough love" scenario. What am I doing? Forgive my little aria; I am an artist, just not a photographer. So, back to the basics for me. That's the goal. Now yes, all the cameras mentioned (including the DLux 4) are more than your basic box cameras, but they all have manual controls, and have constraints that I'll be forced to deal with. I don't know if I'm ready for film (my life is pretty full, and I'm not sure if I'm ready for the extra overhead); I must say, though, that The Online Photographer makes a compelling case for it. (And yes, I will be pricing M6's...). Thanks again, all Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted November 30, 2009 Share #11 Posted November 30, 2009 JS, I have to respectfully disagree with you. Firstly, a novice to photography (although I'm not suggesting that that includes Mark) will benefit from a point and shoot camera that offers auto everything until he has an idea of what he likes to shoot and then wants to experiment by changing the settings, which the D-Lux 4 will offer - through to full manual if that's what he wants. Secondly, how is the Oly E-P1 not a point and shoot camera where the D-Lux 4 is? Yes, you can change lenses but that doesn't make it any less P&S does it? Thirdly, you say "The d-lux4 is ok, but not as your only camera for serious photography." and although I'm not clear what 'serious photography' is by your definition but perhaps you'd like to have a look at some of Jim Radcliffe's photography and let us know where you think the D-Lux 4 falls short of 'serious photography' please? I guess I'm from the old school where you get a manual camera and a single focal length lens and really learn what apertures and shutter speeds (and fast lenses) do. I find that many cameras today have these things too buried in menus and such. Perhaps I should have stated to get a prime for the E-P1 as well... but outside of that, you are correct...not much difference than the DLUX4. Serious, as in learning what the functions of a camera allow you to do. Most cameras today are capable of good images...but not all of them are good for learning on (since there is too much menu diving). To me, there is more to learning photography than framing the photo...but maybe I'm off base there. Do whatever you want, mine was just an opinion. I'm sure Jim Radcliffe did not learn on the dlux4. This is not snoberry. This is just trying to help someone with the easiest way to really learn all aspects of photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrtaber Posted November 30, 2009 Author Share #12 Posted November 30, 2009 JS, I just wanted to make clear that I appreciate your response; I most certainly didn't take any of your comments as snobbery. Thanks again, Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister X Posted November 30, 2009 Share #13 Posted November 30, 2009 I'm in a similar situation, getting back into "art" after earning a BFA a while ago (my previous rig was a Nikon F2S bought new!) and the D-Lux 4 is so feature rich I don't use 90% of it. Regardless of your equipment, the important thing is to focus (pun intended) on your particular aesthetic / style / vision. The benefits for me are: 1. It's doesn't intimidate subjects. 2. The zoom range perfectly brackets my preferred 35mm lens, a 35mm f2. 3. Low light capability 4. RAW imaging. Don't tell people what camera took the picture and I'm sure they'll be impressed by your work, let the image, not the equipment come to the forefront. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted December 1, 2009 Share #14 Posted December 1, 2009 Don't tell people what camera took the picture and I'm sure they'll be impressed by your work, let the image, not the equipment come to the forefront. The camera is capable of great photos... no one is disputing that. However, if you like manual controls and stuff like that, there could be better options. Even the Canon S90 is a better option IMHO. The bottom line is that sometimes a certain camera can make all the difference in comfort and inspiration. I played the P&S vs. SLR digital game for too many years. In the 90s, I went from a Leica M6 to a Contax G1... then, after no longer having access to a darkroom, to many different digital P&S cameras which killed my love of photography... until 10 years later (even after a Nikon DSLR and a DLUX4 both of which did nothing for inspiration) I bought a Leica M2 and the love returned. However, my love of film wasn't there anymore... so I had to get a M8. I guess my point is that sometimes a P&S doesn't cut it...not because of image quality, but because of inspiration. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slash Posted December 1, 2009 Share #15 Posted December 1, 2009 Mark, I learnt the basics of the trinity in about an hour on the Lx3. which was my first ever camera. and i picked that after reading many a review and advice i got in here. that being said, i seem to be bumping up against the limits of late.. i want DoF control, rather than proxying with aperture.. i want better low light performance in jpeg (still trying to figure out how to convert the raw to a jpeg!! all advice appreciated)... and sacrilegous as it may be in this forum, more zoom! before you folks call down the fires of heaven on my head for that last.. i love capturing people when they dont know they are being photographed. the few that i have managed (with mates so that even if they realised they were being photographed, i didnt suddenly find myself on a sticky wicket!).. are brilliant! Slash Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mallo Posted December 3, 2009 Share #16 Posted December 3, 2009 Did you considered the Digilux 2? obviusly is bigger that the D-lux 4 but it offers you the tipical analogical control, a GREAT SUPERB lens and excellent jpegs images, you don't need raw with the Digilux 2. And the price is now very affordable, like 500/600 $ on ebay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted December 3, 2009 Share #17 Posted December 3, 2009 Did you considered the Digilux 2? obviusly is bigger that the D-lux 4 but it offers you the tipical analogical control, a GREAT SUPERB lens and excellent jpegs images, you don't need raw with the Digilux 2. He sold his nikon because it was too big... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertoDeRoma Posted December 3, 2009 Share #18 Posted December 3, 2009 This is just one man's experience and I am not as serious a photographer as many of the people who have already responded. Having said that, I was - once upon a time, in the pre-digital-photography - very interested and passionate about photography. I worked hard to master my 35mm Nikon F2, built a dark-room (remember those?) in my bathroom, and spent me meager student money on all things photo. I took a hiatus to marry, grow a family and have a career. Some 10 years ago, I jumped back into photography by buying a series of digital cameras, leading up to a Nikon D100. While I was able to take good pictures, the digital cameras of those days did for my love and interest in photography what CDs did for music: i.e., made it faster and more convenient, but colder, more mechanical and much less involving than film. And, like CDs vs vinyl, digital photos failed - for one reason or another - to get "my blood flowing." Photography went from being an important part of my life to being a background activity: i.e. take an occasional picture at parties, or on hikes, using the fully automated mode of whatever camera I had around and paying no attention to the artistic aspect of the photo. Fast forward to the Leica D-Lux 4. I am now in a position to afford some great cameras, but the one that captured my attention - after seeing a few shots - was the D-Lux 4. This is the camera that has rekindled my love for photography. This is the camera that has made photography fun and artistic for me again. Why? I am not quite sure, but the combination of portability, lots of options for artistic freedom (fully manual mode, different types of "film", different aspect ratios, etc.,) and amazing picture quality is what I needed. This is the only digital camera where I took my time and enjoyed reading - nay, studying - the manual from end to end. Without breathing chemical fumes in my dark-room, I am experimenting and learning - a lot - by taking several pictures with all sorts of settings. With the quick feedback from digital photography + the great picture quality and options of the DL4, I am learning more about photography than I ever have before. To make a long story short, I highly recommend this camera for people like you who want to learn and - in your own words - savor photography. That's exactly what it has done for me. The DL4 has an 'it' factor that makes a lot of people "love" it (as it's quite obvious from this forum.) So, I recommend buying it and playing with it. Experiment with different "films", combinations of exposure, aperture and ASA, mess around with the macro lens, take B&W photographs, etc. That's what I did. That's what I am doing, and I am savoring every moment. I hope this helps in your decisions, Alberto P.S. I just came back from a 3-day trip to Death Valley. I went there to take pictures and I went there with just the DL4. I will post some of the pictures I took later this week, but I was VERY impressed with the results. Some of the pictures make it look like I really know what I am doing . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.